An extra 6 seconds or so is time well spent given that it would take me longer than that to fish through the feces that are Bing's search results. I'm gaining time. It's efficiency rather than irrationalism. Getting a false lead can suck down a solid minute. I am at a loss as to how anybody could think those 6 seconds are poorly spent.

No. You can have 90% of the money this idiotic suit will cost us, nothing more.Fuck you I want 8 billion dollars.Wow you suck at being a patent troll, fine, we'll go to trial. It'll take a decade and you'll be belly up in five years.

So long as you wouldn't be bailing me out if I were millions of dollars in debt from my collapsing single-truck-empire, then yes that shouldn't be there. But, the damages could certainly be the value of the truck plus the money you might have made if you had the truck, plus interest, minus the value of the now returned truck.

They had a point, people were hating Java at that time because Microsoft was saying they had a proper implementation and it was buggy crap, making people think that Java was buggy crap. That's a pretty solid lawsuit. They are using our trademark and making us look bad.

No. From a legal standpoint Java was released at one point on a free license. So Google has every right to the language. They rewrote the libraries as such (there are notable differences and improvements in Android's). Java was released under an open license at one point. So they totally can use the language as it appeared at that point. Also Java is just gets converted over to Dalvik bytecode and then compiled on ART in modern Android or runs on the Dalvik VM in the earlier versions.

They are *only* using the language itself (and there's some rumor about adopting Swift as a first order language as it was equally opened under an open license).

Make no mistake, Oracle should lose. They don't have to change a thing.

Since the hack needed to access the phone is largely something the Apple or Google would fix if they knew about demanding the source code might expose the vulnerability and thus be refused thereby dismissing the case.

You have the time to go to the judge and get a warrant per the law. If you want to hook some hacking device up to my phone to figure out if I was texting somehow without accessing my private data, I'm going to need the source code to verify that my rights weren't violated. Also, violations of the DMCA apply to me hacking my own phone, not the cops using a device to hack my phone.

There's a pretty bunch of social engineering involved with trick or treaters and one is they go where they go. So the places they go and the people who go there basically is the result of a chaotic process. If you want to prime the pump you need to not only have the houses done up, but on the day get people based on there being people. It's like seeding your case with money while busking or having extra produce while selling produce for the illusion of choice. It's not simply get decorations get destinations, it's actually kind of hard, people tend to go out of their neighborhood to get to the apt places and as such they often go to the same place year after year, so if you got nobody this year, you can't turn it around in a single year. Getting everybody on board isn't enough, you also need to be seen as a place to trick or treat, which means you need people there to get people there.

If you actually care about security maybe you shouldn't let information from the internet control your computer. I mean sure they can edit your webpages via a router to insert whatever, but the inserting whatever part is could just also be malware on the internet proper.

The point of TNO is that you might as well assume your router is altering webpages and inserting malicious content (either that or there's some already on the internet). One should view the internet as a black box of security threats and then just go from there. Yeah, routers can do that stuff. Security is what you do with that understanding. You don't get a router you can trust. You don't trust the router or the rest of the internet.

Seriously price per gb isn't a barrier. They could sell the 120GBs for a dollar, it would just be money losing and stupid. But, it would smash the "barrier". When there ain't nothin' in your way, that ain't a barrier.

Machine Learning System can detect X with such high accuracy and with so few false positives as to be actually useful.

Frankly detecting X is basically defined as getting better than random chance. If you decide that anybody who posts "I am so sad" is suicidal, you'll bound to get a few hits, so there. I developed an algorithm that can detect suicide and depression. The problem here is that it's useless unless it's really really accurate.

To some extent yes, but it's likely way more complicated than that. But, yeah, without sensory input we start hallucinating. It's like asking your senses repeatedly "is that real" and the senses always say yes, rather than no. So you drift off into whatever because that's real and therefore there's this other things too.

It's a bit like that old parlor game where you tell somebody that you're going to have them ask questions about a dream, send them in the other room, asking for dream volunteers, and then tell the people still in the room that the answer is yes if the last letter of the last word of the question ends A-M and no if the last letter of the last word of the question ends N-Z. -- They inevitably guess a dream involving all manner of perverted stuff as the crowd confirms and rejects bits at random. Inventing a dream out of his own head rather than somebody else's head.

There's also every day hallucinations like seeing detail where it doesn't exist, movement where it doesn't exist, and hallucinating something to fill the big blind spot in our eyes.